The Academy Awards

Screen calculus

Back-of-an-envelope stuff

THE smart money in the Oscar race is generally on the likeliest winner rather than the worthiest. That means disregarding personal preference and trying to grasp the mindset of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS), which confers the awards. AMPAS members are old industry hands, not critics, and old is the operative word. Their tastes are conservative and when they vote, they are saying “Gosh, I wish I'd done that.”

This year's Oscars, due on March 23rd, began with no lead runners, but a consensus is emerging. The best picture award will surely go to “Chicago”, not because it is the best but because it is the one with which AMPAS will feel most comfortable. A Broadway musical adaptation, it is the kind of film Hollywood thinks it does well. “My Fair Lady”, “The Sound of Music”, “West Side Story” and “Oliver!” are all past winners in this genre.

Ranged against it are “Gangs of New York” (too violent), “The Hours” (too arty), the second bit of “The Lord of the Rings” (part two of an unfinished trilogy) and the Holocaust film, “The Pianist”, which will be seen as being too similar to “Schindler's List”, not to mention that its director, Roman Polanski, is a convicted felon who skipped bail and fled the country.

In Hollywood's eyes, that must rule him out as best director, too. The other contestants match the best film nominees except for Spain's Pedro Almodóvar—pictured left giving thanks—who slips in for “Talk to Her”. Foreign directors, such as Bernardo Bertolucci and Milos Forman, have won before, but never for a film not in English. Sorry, Pedro.

Oscars usually go to the director of the best picture and Rob Marshall, who made “Chicago”, has already won the Directors Guild of America award. The prize is voted for by virtually the same constituency as the directors' branch of AMPAS, and divergent views are rare.

There has been a popular swell behind Martin Scorsese for “Gangs of New York” because he has never won best director and is thought to be overdue. But he has done better, less sprawling work and AMPAS voters may prefer to wait for a more suitable occasion. Britain's Stephen Daldry, who made “The Hours”, is the outsider for a film that will be seen mainly as a thespian triumph.

It should collect a clutch of acting awards, though. Despite the nose job, Nicole Kidman's Virginia Woolf does not look like the author, but she projects an interpretation of this evidently difficult woman that brings the role memorably to life. Ms Kidman might have won last year if nominated for “The Others” rather than “Moulin Rouge!”; this year she looks unbeatable against Renée Zellweger (“Chicago”), Diane Lane (“Unfaithful”) and Salma Hayek (“Frida”).

There's an Oscar tradition of the awards for best actress and supporting actress coming from the same film. Think of Vivien Leigh and Kim Hunter in “A Streetcar Named Desire”, Anne Bancroft and Patty Duke in “The Miracle Worker”, and Holly Hunter and Anna Paquin in “The Piano”. This year may follow suit. Although Julianne Moore is nominated as best actress for “Far From Heaven”, she is also up for best supporting actress for “The Hours”. With simultaneous nominations, the award generally goes to the supporting performance—witness Teresa Wright in 1943 for “Mrs Miniver” rather than as best actress for “The Pride of the Yankees”.

Ms Moore's only serious rival as best supporting actress is Meryl Streep in “Adaptation”, but she has won twice before and Oscar likes to spread its bounty. A better bet from this film is the popular Chris Cooper as best supporting actor.

Multiple previous wins may also count against Jack Nicholson as best actor for “About Schmidt”. Nobody disputes the quality of his performance, but is he delivering more than an older, seedier version of his winning work in “As Good As It Gets”? And that was his third Oscar.

If Michael Caine wins for “The Quiet American”, he would also become a three-times winner, while Nicolas Cage (for “Adaptation”) would be a doubleton—or is it a tripleton, since he plays twins? The doubleton likely to win is Daniel Day-Lewis for “Gangs of New York”. His 19th-century proto-gangster is one of those performances that hit AMPAS voters in the solar plexus. Charles Laughton as Henry VIII, Lee Marvin and Peter Finch have done so before. And it cannot hurt that when he last won an Oscar, Mr Day-Lewis looked so very different as the palsied paraplegic, Christy Brown, in “My Left Foot”.